skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thing is, requirement for on-site employment requires you to live where lots of people live; only the very wealthy can afford to live in places without jobs nearby - as UBI decouples income from where you live, then it would be a pressure to equalize rents, as underemployed people - the demand for whose labor is decreasing and will decrease further - can afford live in the many places which are currently shedding population because of lack of jobs despite being actually very nice to live in.
That helps me think of it
We Are Preparing a Class Action Lawsuit Against Robinhood
Uuuuh, no.
Raising safety concerns is important.
And it is a safety concern. I had the same exact concern when I saw it just as I had safety concerns about hypothetically owning KITT growing up.

It is a concern, it could cost lives, it should be raised.
Yep, how is this not market manipulation?!

https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/robinhood/company_fi...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-28/dan-sundh...

I'm sure there are other investors on that list losing money from this whole thing too.
So as a platform Robinhood wants to make money from trading options, but it will shut down the platform when it sees too much risk for itself? If so, would this damage the trust to Robinhood?
Figuring out just how they're assholes in real life helps understand and contextualize the problem better. Are they oblivious, or dropping offensive memes at his kid, etc?
Opus has frame sizes down to 2.5ms. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_(audio_format)#cite_not...
China Lake's development of the Sidewinder missile is a similar story - minimal resources, compared to the vast amounts wasted on radar guided missiles that more or less didn't work until much later.

However, I think it's orthogonal. Limitations are good, but having a basic fallback is also good.
It's still up - https://twitter.com/RashidaTlaib/status/1354807292667981828?...
Even if the repo is open to PRs, you want to make sure you're not duplicating work someone else is doing and that you have all the requirements.
> Id hardly call the current value of Gamestop to be "real" Economics.

Yeah that's the whole damn point. Some normies figured out how to play their fake little game.
The Pythagorean Cup Economy
Is there a source for the 40% figure? It seems to allude that the fund in question is Citadel.
Electricians $50-60k: https://www.indeed.com/career/electrician/salaries https://www.salary.com/research/salary/alternate/electrician...

Plumbers: $60k https://www.salaryexpert.com/salary/job/plumber/united-state... https://www.salary.com/research/salary/alternate/licensed-pl...

Now those aren't self employed, but

"What Kind of Money Can a Self-Employed Master Plumber Make Annually?"

Suggest maybe 20% more for self employed

https://bizfluent.com/info-12088771-kind-money-can-selfemplo...

"The salary for a master plumber with more than 20 years of experience ranges from $43,790 to $74,700 a year"

Do you have any data rather than your self-selecting annecdote?
That's worse. Institutional investors want people to sell. It's in their advantage. It quite clearly a one way benefit for banning purchase but not selling.
You do not have to charge for an hour every 200km in a Tesla at the super chargers in the US.
> But I agree about the memory usage, qute uses insane amounts of memory and it gets worse over time, I think this is caused primarily by memory fragmentation in python- but it’s more evident with large memory hungry programs like a browser.

Yeah, something is leaking memory. Unfortunately, nobody has figured out what exactly yet - and everything I've seen so far is not pointing to Python (or qutebrowser) as a culprit:

https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/issues/1476#issue...
This movie sums up how I imagine this tech will evolve. Maybe better than what is in this movie. These drones take too long to identify friend or foe. [1] Or maybe we will skip that step and just eliminate anything that moves or has a heat or electrical signature in a zone.

[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEby9OkePpg
My comment wasn't targeted at Purism, I hoped a break after 'More,' would have helped make that point but I should have used better grammar.

Apart from that I stand by what I said.
Robinhood does allow you to transfer holdings directly to another brokerage (for a $75 fee).

https://robinhood.com/us/en/support/articles/transfer-stocks...
Why not Ctrl+Z to get back to the prompt and then cursor up to get the last command? You can `fg` or even `bg` as desired to resume.
Its a private company providing a service for FREE. YOU ARE THE PRODUCT. Just like twitter, they are allowed to control what happens on their platform, and they make no guarantee about reliability or free trade.
"Think about what your readers might already know."

This alone is an excellent starting point. You know the feeling of dismay when someone starts talking beneath your level of understanding and you fear they'll never go above it? Thinking about what your audience (written or spoken) might already know is the intelligent, considerate, and efficacious thing to do.
> This passertion is disingenuous. The whole point is that the reason why bad code is bad is not because it's OO, it's because it's bad code.

This is pretty false on its face. Let's say that some paradigm insists that inheritance should be used for every problem. Almost all programmers agree that this is bad code, thus code written in this paradigm is bad because of the paradigm.

> You do not fix bad code by switching programming paradigm, specially if it's to move back to procedural programming and wheel reinvention due to irrational class-phobia.

Agreed. Instead you should start with your current paradigm and remove the problematic aspects until you're left with something that works reasonably well. I posit that when you start with OO and drop its problematic aspects like inheritance or Armstrong's observation of banana-gorilla-jungle architecture, you end up with something that looks pretty functional or data-oriented, a la idiomatic Go or Rust. If your definition of "OO" already excludes these things, then it probably looks something like Go or Rust or perhaps even Erlang.

The issue I'm raising with "OO" is that there is no consensus about what OO is; rather every defense of OO is about what it isn't (and then there's the ever predictable straw man, "But you can write bad code in any paradigm!").
> (siding against their own customers)?

You misunderstand who their customers are. Who you're calling customers are users. Their customers, the ones who pay them, are the dark pools and other trade routers, or whatever they are called, who pay RH for routing trades thorough them.
Did you not read the tweet or are you just trying to misrepresent her argument? She is asking why different sets of trading rules are apply to retail and institutional investors. If retail can sell, but can't buy, who are they selling to?

"We now need to know more about
@RobinhoodApp’s decision to block retail investors from purchasing stock while hedge funds are freely able to trade the stock as they see fit."
It didn’t make much sense to me yesterday when Chamath and others were saying the system was rigged against the small investors. It totally does today. These actions are nothing but The powerful signaling to the small investors whose turf they encroached on.

I just shutdown my Robinhood (they have the audacity to use that name while stealing from the poor) account
Its going bankrupt in the medium term if nothing changes, but that ratio of shorts would only make sense if it was going bankrupt in a quarter or two, where Gamestop actually rallied on revenue with the release of the new console generation.
That's not a bull case.

Yeah, we know these are real people who exist. But there's a finite number of them, and we're talking about what happens after they've all either paid up or gone broke and everyone else is stuck with the shares of Gamestop they paid $450 for.
When Melvin Capital sold a metric ton of naked shorts on GameStop, no one was there to tell them it wouldn't end up well. It was certainly a risk, but not really a bad one going on fundamentals. They just failed to predict the mob mentality of retail investors.

Of course, those retail investors who got in on Thursday, Friday, or Monday; that seemed like a bad purchase. So bad that Melvin double-downed on their naked short position. There's no way the stock could go up. The fundamentals aren't there. But it did. A lot. And those retail investors made a ton of money.

So, we're at today, where you're saying that it would be a bad time to invest because it won't end well. You, and to some degree Robinhood, are making a prediction on the stock market. You may be right; you may be wrong; but you're definitely not certainly right or certainly wrong. You're making the same mistake anyone who tries to pick stocks does; you're just doing it in reverse.
> One way is to become more restrictive in licensing, choosing only copyleft licenses that were originally created to offer more protections to individuals than corporations.

I would disagree with how you made that characterization. Licenses apply equally to everyone, and corporations are made of individuals.

If you meant end users vs. service providers, that's what Elastic did and to end users their new license looks more permissive than GPL 3.0. Yes it does have "a major restriction", but it doesn't force individual users and even those who redistribute Elastic software to release their modifications, whereas GPL 3.0 would have that effect.

To me - a user - the new Elasticsearch license is more permissive (because before some Elasticsearch add-ons were restricted) and I can live with that.
Amazon - thanks to a more permissive license that Elasticsearch used to release under - can still do their thing. Good luck to them. If that license wasn't permissive they wouldn't be able to do this.
And the Fedora community and other busybodies ... I don't care what they say :-)
Foundation (Part Two)
No, I think she would prefer that exchanges didn't restrict purely in an effort to "protect" retail investors and nakedly do the bidding to protect larger institutional investors who are getting squeezed.

A brokerage NOT allowing buys, sells, margins, options on a security is well within their right to do so. It's only when they start to take positions that limit an investor's ability to manage their own risk that it gets a little fishy...
> Eh? AWS could have killed ELK in 5 minutes.

I don't understand this part. AWS doesn't have anything internally that would compete against ELK. Unless you are taking about AWS buying ELK flat out. But then Azure and GCP can fork ELK and keep selling the service. Is my assumption incorrect?
I can think of three which are front ends for the HIVE blockchain;

https://d.buzz/
https://hive.blog/
https://peakd.com/
So basically a pump and dump.
Had an AMC buy go through today on Freetrade too.
Your first point is interesting to me. I have a friend that made a crazy call on some stock options that seemed to me like 10 to 1 odds. When I asked him why he said essentially, it's the only way I'll ever have a chance to get rich.

I think a lot of Americans may be driven to entrepreneurship because, short of the lottery, it may seem to them the only way to climb the ladder.

Countries where life is a little more ... comfortable? ... may have fewer people willing to roll the dice (so to speak).
As far as I know, they were automatic handbrakes based on excessive volatility. A feature designed to prevent chaos and people from over buying/selling due to panic.
They should rename to Robbin' 'Hood
The supply of housing in the places people do want to live is artificially constrained, intentionally driving up prices to achieve the New Segregation.
It's not about making money, it's about sending a message, and we can send a message with our money. Not their business how we burn it.
Gates was also introduced to Warren Buffett through his dad.
Limitations like Tuples in elm are restricted to just two elements, because the author feels tuples greater than length of two should be better modelled as a named record.

Nested record updates are also not supported, so u have to write functions to update each record field.

Elm is by design a very opinionated language, which is good for beginners usually since there is only one chosen way to do things but not so for experienced devs.

The fun parts of FP are still present in elm, it's completely pure side effect free, great type checker with awesome error messages, fast performance and great for building interactive web apps with it's TEA architecture.
from what I've read, selling gme is the one thing they are allowed to do with it
"Everyone" includes other users who would benefit from the fix, the PR author who can continue using the same version as everyone else, and yes, the maintainer who is foregoing even the possibility of the fix without starting from scratch. As I said in my comment, it makes total sense to me to look at a major change or a risky fix and say "no this isn't worth my time". But I'm sure we've all had those bugs where they take forever to track down until eventually you find a simple problem in code that is obviously an error. To not even take a look at it, as a rigid matter of policy? Yes, I absolutely think open-source maintainers would be missing out on saving some larger efforts.

edit: And to be clear, I freely acknowledge the inverse in my original comment. As TFA explains they were seeing a lot of PRs with unintended side-effects that were complex and counter-intuitive. At no point have I said people MUST accept this as part of the terms of a copyleft license as the original replier seems to think. I used phrases like "I do wish" and "I'd so much rather" and "They don't have to", so obviously it's preference I have. But that's my preference as not only a user of open-source software, but as a committer / PMC member on multiple Apache projects and other open-source projects. It's not remotely coming from a position of entitlement for free-as-in-beer software or ignorance of what it takes to develop and maintain open-source software.
Ask HN: How to Stop Reddit Addiction?
r/reddit could not help me.
> It seems to be difficult to generalize about these things. Someone will say that a particular version of a browser leaks memory, or pegs the CPU, and someone else will say that the same version has no problems.

FWIW that's indeed my experience with qutebrowser as well. Everyone seems to have rather different experiences (or expectations?) when it comes to performance and RAM usage. Doesn't exactly make it easier to track issues down, unfortunately.
> given that Robinhood got 40% of their revenue from a shorter

I'm seeing one tweet from Adam Hackney claiming this [1]. Do we have a real source?

[1] https://twitter.com/mindmeld_me/status/1354807424998281217
Modern Way to Create Elegant Website Menu with Drop Down Menu Generator
Europe’s Vaccination Debacle
Yeah it must be, they gave funds to Melvin Capital which took a beating on GME, and make money off Robinhood's customer flow.
>>lately it seems that "the right" remains undecided about whether or not it is acceptable to threaten the lives of politicians who refused to overturn the results of an election>>

This isn't even remotely a representative sentiment of the 70+ million people that are not on the "left".

>>"The left" is for democracy>>

Again, I don't think we would find this accurate if data were collected. Both sides are "for democracy". I think what you would find is something slightly more refined: that one side appreciates that democracy alone is flawed and requires a strong constitution to guard against its propensity to oppress individuals. The other side finds a constitution that limits democracy too constraining.
This says ultra low delay, but how low? It seems to me like it's still going to be limited by the browser, and then you're going to have network latency on top of that?

Testing in Chrome on Mac OS 11.1, the lowest latency I can get is 23ms while in Firefox it's 14ms: https://www.jefftk.com/test/latency-demo-5
Are there any charts that aren't piecemeal?

Saying that there's wealth deficit for millennials/genx because boomers have accumulated more wealth later in life is a little handy-wavy.

What did the boomer chart look like when they were 20-35? What will the genx chart look like when they're 50-70? And what will the millennial chart look like when they're 30-70?

Edit - 70+ for everyone would be good too.
I downloaded 3.6 because I read it has a very customizable interface. I wanted to add a feature, only to find out it already has it. Example; when I am browsing Twitter I want the bookmarks bar across the top to only have my Twitter folders. I can do this in Vivaldi by right clicking on my Twitter folder and selecting "Set As Bookmark Bar Folder." Nice.
Watching this unfold makes so many of the early criticism of Bitcoin look ridiculous.
Scanned images are totally PDF/A-compliant. The standard is just about reproducible archiving, nothing else. Bitmaps are perfectly reproducible and pass every compliance check. That PDF/A is more accessible than any old PDF is just a side-effect.
Arbitration is usually bad for consumers but in volume it can be terrible for the offending company. Ususally folks dont go through it with but if you get WSB to ally and do mass arbitration to stick it to the man robinhood is an a world of hurt on legal costs.
Their customers aren't their users - it's the institutions paying them for order flow.
Modified Orange Juice Test
Well probably to stop people buying at $500. If at any point it crashes to $100 it's going to make people more upset.
It’s likely this is a bad idea, but the interface is only half the equation. We’re looking at form factor not the actual implication. Personally I was expecting their autopilot rollout to be a safety disaster, similarly I assumed forgoing a dashboard would be a huge issue, so having been proven wrong before I am simply reserving judgement.
I don't think this was Robinhood's choice.

Robinhood doesn't actually execute any trades. They sell user's trade orders to Citadel, a trade executor. Citadel then buys the shares on the market, and sells them to Robinhood for a slight markup. It's how Robinhood offers trades for $0 fees. You pay pennies more per share, but don't have to spend $5 per trade.

Citadel, and other trade executors, are refusing to buy shares for retail traders. Coincidentally, Citadel also bailed out Melvin fund for their short position in GME. So, Citadel has an interest in not letting the price go up any further. And citadel controls trade execution for dozens of firms.

This is definitely illegal. But Citadel is betting that the resulting SEC fines from this illegal manipulation will be less than the loss they would get if they didn't suppress the price.
Brokers are covering their asses. You're projecting a positive spin on this when I literally said "this is actively hurting investors"

-

Something insane is happening, claims of market manipulation are flying, Congress is saying they're going to investigate, what started as a meme is suddenly picking up more daily volume than SPY...

There's going to be a bloodbath, and their options are:

- do absolutely nothing, watch people get slaughtered. This is what they normally do!

- start removing yourself from the blast radius and pop the bubble, watch people get slaughtered.

The second case still hurts people, it's not some benevolent thing they're doing! They're doing it because it covers their asses a bit.

Because this time with all the tricky stuff happening with claims of manipulation, the insane volatility, the insane publicity, and most importantly the insane volume, they're afraid they might be opening themselves up to some sort of liability.

sec.gov/rules/other/2013/34-69013.pdf

Broker-dealers aren't supposed to hold your hand, but there is guidance that they should provide some meaningful sort of hand rails for retail investors.

Usually they make money either way and sit back, but this time the same way the masses have been concentrated at a stock ticker, the masses (and Congress) could end up concentrated at their door step asking why they let this happen...

They'd rather have AOC threatening to ask why a stock that's been spiked %1,400 in a month was deemed too high volatility for clients than the SEC asking why they let so many people take a bath on a meme gone wild...
> But maybe they're onto something. Maybe blindly adopting permissive open source licenses to invite more corporate ownership isn't the right answer.

I do think this is the answer. Try to use LGPL, GPL or AGPL as appropriate.

I also agree with some people that there's an issue with framing the question as defending the right of developers to get paid for open source. This was never much of a thing by default. People have been trying to build FOSS companies, with varying success. But I would guess most end user-facing things, like GNU, Linux, VLC etc. were built by academics or hobbyists, or foundations. Commercial FOSS tries to sell infrastructure to enterprises. It's not things you and I would use if we weren't IT professionals.

(Linux is a peculiar beast here. The kernel is largely developed by big corps, but playing by the copyleft rules, because it's such a fundamental infrastructure. Big distros like Ubuntu and Fedora are the middle ground where they can be freely used by individual people, but are a side effect of Canonical and Red Hat's development processes.)

The correct framing of FOSS is benefit of the users and the society at large. We use .?GPL to ensure that the software that people use is inspectable, and modifiable if the vendor does something bad. Thus we serve people's, and our own, interests in the long term. We reduce the area where companies can damage the public for profit, when hiding behind closed source, unchangeable dark patterns, "hai we ban you there is no appeals" etc. etc. That the essential software can be had free of charge in practice is also a nice thing... to some extent.

The answer to the problem of compensating the developers was never much directly solved by FOSS. (Of course, you can try to use it to also get hired, to sell hosting or support.) This is a social/political/economic problem. Trying to solve it with licensing (a.k.a. copyright law hacking) is and understandable effort, but very likely a dead end.

EDIT: I see under the sibling comments that the OP is more specifically concerned about the fundamental and "invisible" projects like sudo. I can't add much on that, but I do think there's value in getting (some) signaling and (some) bargaining power by choosing copyleft. Especially if there would be solidarity and consensus among developers in doing this.
> I stopped due to the lack of good ad blocking, but sorely miss the key bindings every day. Will give it a new try now!

Welcome back then! Happy about feedback if you miss something else :)

If qutebrowser isn't for you, there are also various other browser addons you might want to try:

https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser#similar-projects
What would you feel a simple solution be? Maybe you know something that others don't... or maybe it is just really hard to have a standard across millions of different ways of deploying and running software systems.
>ne common approach is SaaS, where the software is open source and you provide value by selling hosted versions, with paid support, competing on the reliability and utility of your infrastructure, expertise of your support staff, and integrity of your business

The big problem with this is that most of the large enterprises which are really spending the money for this, 99% of the time are going to pick Amazon or Microsoft or IBM for hosting/support over AwesomeOpenSourceLibrary LLC, especially since they likely already have contracts with those companies.

From a practical point of view, if I have N open source libraries that I use in production, as a large company, it is better for me if I have Amazon support all N libraries, than having N different contracts with N different companies for support/hosting.